I answered them that it is not the custom of the Romans to give up any man to destruction before the accused has met the accusers face to face and has had opportunity to make his defense concerning the matter laid against him. When therefore they had come together here, I didn’t delay, but on the next day sat on the judgment seat and commanded the man to be brought. When the accusers stood up, they brought no charges against him of such things as I supposed; but had certain questions against him about their own religion, and about one Jesus, who was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.
Show the surrounding paragraph
Acts 25:16-19 sits inside this longer paragraph.
Now when some days had passed, King Agrippa and Bernice arrived at Caesarea, and greeted Festus. As he stayed there many days, Festus laid Paul’s case before the king, saying, “There is a certain man left a prisoner by Felix; about whom, when I was at Jerusalem, the chief priests and the elders of the Jews informed me, asking for a sentence against him. I answered them that it is not the custom of the Romans to give up any man to destruction before the accused has met the accusers face to face and has had opportunity to make his defense concerning the matter laid against him. When therefore they had come together here, I didn’t delay, but on the next day sat on the judgment seat and commanded the man to be brought. When the accusers stood up, they brought no charges against him of such things as I supposed; but had certain questions against him about their own religion, and about one Jesus, who was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. Being perplexed how to inquire concerning these things, I asked whether he was willing to go to Jerusalem and there be judged concerning these matters. But when Paul had appealed to be kept for the decision of the emperor, I commanded him to be kept until I could send him to Caesar.”
Parallel Translations
-
I answered them that it is not the custom of the Romans to give up any man to destruction before the accused has met the accusers face to face and has had opportunity to make his defense concerning the matter laid against him.
When therefore they had come together here, I didn’t delay, but on the next day sat on the judgment seat and commanded the man to be brought.
When the accusers stood up, they brought no charges against him of such things as I supposed;
but had certain questions against him about their own religion, and about one Jesus, who was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.
-
To whom I answered: It is not the maner of the Romayns to delyver eny man that he shuld perisshe before that he which is accused have the accusars before him and have licence to answer for him selfe concerninge the cryme layde agaynst him:
when they were come hidder with out delaye on the morowe I sate to geve iudgement and commaunded the man to be brought forthe.
Agaynst who when the accusers stode vp they brought none accusacion of soche thinges as I supposed:
but had certayne questions agaynst him of their awne supersticion and of one Iesus which was ded: whom Paul affirmed to be alyve.
Show all 3 translations
-
To whome I answered, that it is not the maner of the Romanes for fauour to deliuer any man to the death, before that hee which is accused, haue the accusers before him, and haue place to defend himselfe, concerning the crime.
Therefore when they were come hither, without delay the day following I sate on the iudgement seate, and commanded the man to be brought foorth.
Against whom when the accusers stood vp, they brought no crime of such things as I supposed:
But had certaine questions against him of their owne superstition, and of one Iesus which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be aliue.
Cross-references (22)
- John 7:51 (v16) “Does our law judge a man, unless it first hears from him personally and knows what he does?”
- Acts 23:29 (v19) I found him to be accused about questions of their law, but not to be charged with anything worthy of death or of imprisonment.
- Deuteronomy 19:17-18 (v16) then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before Yahweh, before the priests and the judges who shall be in those…
- Acts 18:15 (v19) but if they are questions about words and names and your own law, look to it yourselves. For I don’t want to be a judge of these matters.”
- Acts 23:30 (v16) When I was told that the Jews lay in wait for the man, I sent him to you immediately, charging his accusers also to bring their accusations…
Show all 22 cross-references
- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 (v19) For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was…
- Proverbs 18:17 (v16) He who pleads his cause first seems right; until another comes and questions him.
- Acts 25:4-5 (v16) However Festus answered that Paul should be kept in custody at Caesarea, and that he himself was about to depart shortly. “Let them…
- Acts 25:6 (v17) When he had stayed among them more than ten days, he went down to Caesarea, and on the next day he sat on the judgment seat, and commanded…
- Acts 25:10 (v17) But Paul said, “I am standing before Caesar’s judgment seat, where I ought to be tried. I have done no wrong to the Jews, as you also know…
- Acts 1:22 (v19) beginning from the baptism of John, to the day that he was received up from us, of these one must become a witness with us of his…
- Acts 2:32 (v19) This Jesus God raised up, to which we all are witnesses.
- Acts 17:22-23 (v19) Paul stood in the middle of the Areopagus, and said, “You men of Athens, I perceive that you are very religious in all things. For as I…
- Acts 17:31 (v19) because he has appointed a day in which he will judge the world in righteousness by the man whom he has ordained; of which he has given…
- Acts 18:19 (v19) He came to Ephesus, and he left them there; but he himself entered into the synagogue, and reasoned with the Jews.
- Acts 25:7 (v19) When he had come, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood around him, bringing against him many and grievous charges which they…
- Acts 26:22-23 (v19) Having therefore obtained the help that is from God, I stand to this day testifying both to small and great, saying nothing but what the…
- 1 Corinthians 15:14-20 (v19) If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain, and your faith also is in vain. Yes, we are also found false witnesses of…
- Revelation 1:18 (v19) and the Living one. I was dead, and behold, I am alive forever and ever. Amen. I have the keys of Death and of Hades.
- Deuteronomy 17:4 (v16) and you are told, and you have heard of it, then you shall inquire diligently. Behold, if it is true, and the thing certain, that such…
- Proverbs 18:13 (v16) He who answers before he hears, that is folly and shame to him.
- Acts 26:1 (v16) Agrippa said to Paul, “You may speak for yourself.” Then Paul stretched out his hand, and made his defense.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this passage (20 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain On v18 18. They laid no such crime to his charge.…
18. They laid no such crime to his charge. I marvel why Festus doth say, that there was no such crime objected to Paul as he supposed, seeing he was accused of sedition; but we may again conjecture by this, yea, plainly know, that their accusations were so vain, that they ought not to have been brought before the judgment-seat; as if a man did utter a slanderous speech unadvisedly. For which cause he saith, that the state of the cause did consist in questions of the law. Therefore, we see that he putteth a difference between those offenses which were wont to be punished by man’s laws, and the controversy which was between Paul and the Jews; not that the religion ought to be corrupted freely, or that their malapertness is tolerable, who overthrow the worship of God with their own inventions; but because the man being a Roman, cared not for Moses’ law; therefore he speaketh so disdainfully when he saith, that they did strive about their superstition; though this word δεισιδαιμονια be taken of the Grecians, as well in good as evil part; to wit, because the worshipping of false gods was common in all places. Notwithstanding, his meaning is, that he careth not what manner of religion the Jews have. And no marvel if a man which was an ethnic, [heathen] and had not learned that the rule of godliness must be fet [sought] from the mouth of God, know not how to distinguish between the pure worship of God and superstitions.
Wherefore, we must hold fast that mark whereby we may discern the one from the other, that there is no godliness but that which is grounded in the knowledge of faith, lest we grabble [grope] in darkness. Moreover, the Romans were so drunken with prosperous success, that they thought that they were more acceptable to God than any other; as at this day the Turks, by reason of their manifold victories, deride the doctrine of Christ. This was a lamentable case, that a man being an unbeliever and idolater, sitteth as judge amidst the Jews, to give judgment of the sacred oracles of God according to his ignorance, but all the fault was in Paul’s adversaries, who did not care for the majesty of God, so they might satisfy and obey their own madness. Notwithstanding, there rested nothing for Paul to do, but to clear himself of those crimes which were laid against him. So at this day, though inward brawls, which are among Christians, do defame the name of Christ and his gospel among the Turks and Jews, yet the defenders of holy doctrine are unworthily blamed, which are enforced to enter the combat.
Read full note →
Of one Jesus. It is not to be doubted but that Paul intreated, both gravely and with such vehemency as became him, of the resurrection of Christ; but Festus, by reason of his pride, thought it no meet matter for him to occupy his head about. He doth not, indeed, openly deride Paul, but he showeth plainly how negligently he heard him when he disputed of Christ. Whereby we see how little preaching availeth, yea, that it availeth nothing at all, unless the Spirit of God do inwardly touch the hearts of men. For the wicked do lightly pass over whatsoever is spoken, as if a man should tell them a tale of Robin Hood. Wherefore, there is no cause why the carelessness of many should trouble us at this day, seeing Paul prevailed nothing with Festus. But this place doth witness that many speeches did pass in the handling of the matter, whereof Luke maketh no mention. For he had spoken nothing as yet of Christ, and yet this latter narration doth show that Paul intreated seriously before the Jews of his death and resurrection. Which could not be, but he must needs intreat of the principal points of the gospel. Therefore, I guess that Paul did so handle the matter, that when he had refuted the false accusations of the Jews, wherewith they went about to burden him before the governor, having gotten a fit occasion, he began afterward to speak freely of Christ.
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv16, 19 The Romans used not to deliver any man to…
The Romans used not to deliver any man to be punished before, etc.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv16–19 16 To whom I answered, It is not the…
16 To whom I answered, It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man to die, before that he which is accused have the accusers face to face, and have licence to answer for himself concerning the crime laid against him.
Ver. 16. Have the accusers face to face] Here was no oath ex officio to force a man to accuse himself. Among the Romans the accusers sat in those seats that were at the left hand of the judge; the accused and his advocate at the right hand. The accuser had three hours allotted him, the defendant six. And if he were found guilty, yet was he not given up to his adversaries to be punished at their pleasure (as these Jews would have had it) but as the judge appointed it.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv16–19 To condemn any man indicta causa, without sufficient cause…
To condemn any man indicta causa, without sufficient cause alleged and proved, is not only against the laws of the Romans, but of the Jews, Deu 17:4; nay, against the law of nature and of all nations. Yet malice had so far blinded the enemies of St. Paul, that they go about such things as a heathen reproves, and the very light of nature condemns.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv16–19 To whom I answered,.... As follows:
To whom I answered,.... As follows:
it is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man to die; or to give any man to destruction; to pass sentence of death upon him, without hearing his cause, and purely at the request of another, and merely to gratify him:
Read full note →
before that he which is accused have the accusers face to face; so as to speak to his face, or before him, what they have to charge him with:
and have licence to answer for himself, concerning the crime laid against him; and this was also according to the law of the Jews, Joh 7:51 though Festus, from such an application to him by the chief priests and elders, might conclude that their manner was different, he being ignorant of their laws and customs; but their prejudice to the apostle carried them to act such an illegal part, or at least to desire it might be acted: it is one of the Jewish canons, that it is unlawful for a judge to hear one of the contending parties, before the other is come in.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv16, 18, 19 It is not the custom of the Roman -…
It is not the custom of the Roman - How excellent a rule, to condemn no one unheard! A rule, which as it is common to all nations, (courts of inquisition only excepted,) so it ought to direct our proceedings in all affairs, not only in public, but private life.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv16, 18, 19 Verse 16. It is not the manner of the…
Verse 16. It is not the manner of the Romans to deliver any man to die] Χαριζεσθαι τινα ανθρωπον, To MAKE A PRESENT of any man; gratuitously to give up the life of any man, through favour or caprice. Here is a reference to the subject discussed on Ac 25:11.
Before that he which is accused have the accusers face to face, c.] For this righteous procedure the Roman laws were celebrated over the civilized world. APPIAN, in his Hist. Roman., says: ου πατριον σφισιν ακριτους καταδικαζεσθαι. It is not their custom to condemn men before they have been heard. And PHILO De Praesid. Rom., says: τοτε γαρ κοινους ἑαυτους παρεχοντες δικαϚας εξ ισου, και των κατηγορων και απολογουμενων ακουομενοι, μηδενος ακριτου προκαταγινωσκειν αξιουντες, εβραβευον ουτε προς εχθραν, ουτε προς χαριν, αλλα προς την φυσιν της αληθειας, τα δοξαντα ειναι δικαια. "For then, by giving sentence in common, and hearing impartially both plaintiff and defendant, not thinking it right to condemn any person unheard, they decided as appeared to them to be just without either enmity or favour, but according to the merits of the case." See Bp. Pearce. England can boast such laws, not only in her statute books, but in constant operation in all her courts of justice. Even the king himself, were he so inclined, could not imprison nor punish a man without the regular procedure of the law; and twelve honest men, before whom the evidence has been adduced, the case argued, and the law laid down and explained, are ultimately to judge whether the man be guilty or not guilty. Here, in this favoured country, are no arbitrary imprisonments-no Bastiles-no lettres de cachet. Lex facit Regem: the law makes the king, says Bracton, and the king is the grand executor and guardian of the laws-laws, in the eyes of which the character, property, and life of every subject are sacred.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On v18 Act 25:18-19. Against whom, when the accusers stood up…
Act 25:18-19. Against whom, when the accusers stood up — And offered what they had to say; they brought none accusation of such things as I supposed — From the general clamour they had made against him, as a seditious and dangerous person, they would have done. He had inferred, from the eagerness of their prosecution, and their urging the matter thus upon the Roman governors, one after another, 1st, That they had something to accuse him of, which was dangerous either to private property or to the public peace. Such were the outcries against the primitive Christians: so loud, so fierce, that the standers by, who judged of them by those outcries, could not but conclude that they were the worst of men; and, indeed, to represent them as such was the design of that clamour, as it was of that against our Saviour. 2d, That they had something to accuse him of that was cognizable in the Roman courts, and of which the governor was properly the judge; as Gallio expected, Act 18:14. Otherwise it was absurd and ridiculous to trouble him with it. But had certain questions — Disputable matters; against him of their own superstition — Or religion rather; for, as Agrippa was a Jew, and now came to pay a visit of respect to Festus on his arrival at his province, it is improbable that he would use so rude a word as one that properly signified superstition: so that this text affords a further argument that the word δεισιδαιμονια will admit a milder interpretation, as has been observed on Act 17:22; and of one Jesus — Thus does Festus speak of him to whom every knee shall bow; which was dead — Or had been dead; whom Paul — Unaccountably; affirmed to be alive — Though, at the same time, he acknowledged that he had been crucified at Jerusalem, and expired on the cross. And was this a doubtful question? But why, O Festus, didst thou doubt concerning it? Only because thou didst not search into the evidence of it. Otherwise that evidence might have opened to thee till it had grown up into full conviction; and thy illustrious prisoner had led thee into the glorious liberty of the children of God!
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv16–19 It is not the manner ... - He here…
It is not the manner ... - He here states the reasons which he gave the Jews for not delivering Paul into their hands. In Act 25:4-5, we have an account of the fact that he would not accede to the requests of the Jews; and he here states that the reason of his refusal was that it was contrary to the Roman law. Appian, in his Roman History, says, “It is not their custom to condemn men before they are heard.” Philo (DePraesi. Rom.) says the same thing. In Tacitus (History, ii.) it is said, “A defendant is not to be prohibited from adducing all things by which his innocence may be established.” It was for this that the equity of the Roman jurisprudence was celebrated throughout the world. We may remark that it is a subject of sincere gratitude to the God of our nation that this privilege is enjoyed in the highest perfection in this land. It is a right which every man has: to be heard; to know the charges against him; to be confronted with the witnesses; to make his defense; and to be tried by the laws, and not by the passions and caprices of people. In this respect our jurisprudence surpasses all that Rome ever enjoyed, and is not inferior to that of the most favored nation of the earth.
To deliver - To give him up as a favor χαρίζεσθαι charizesthai to popular clamor and caprice. Yet our Saviour, in violation of the Roman laws, was thus given up by Pilate, Mat 27:18-25.
Read full note →
Have the accusers face to face - That he may know who they are and hear their accusations. Nothing contributes more to justice than this. Tyrants permit people to be accused without knowing who the accusers are, and without an opportunity of meeting the charges. It is one great principle of modern jurisprudence that the accused may know the accusers, and be permitted to confront the witnesses, and to adduce all the testimony possible in his own defense.
And have licence - Greek: “place of apology” - may have the liberty of defending himself.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On v19 Their own superstition.[3] Their particular religion, and manner of…
Their own superstition.[3] Their particular religion, and manner of worshipping their God. (Witham)
===============================
Read full note →
[BIBLIOGRAPHY]
De sua superstitione, Greek: peri tes idias deisidaimonias.
====================
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv16, 18, 19 to deliver any man to die--On the word "deliver…
to deliver any man to die--On the word "deliver up," see on Act 25:11.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv16, 18, 19 16. Manner of the Romans—We have here a noble…
16. Manner of the Romans—We have here a noble maxim, lying at the basis of all just jurisprudence. There is no proof that Festus violated it.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv16–19 16. to deliver any man to die] The best…
16. to deliver any man to die] The best MSS. omit the Greek for the last two words. Rev. Ver. renders “to give up any man.” The verb is the same as in Act_25:11, and implies the granting as a favour. The language throughout shews that the Jews thought the influence of their party was enough to gain from Festus the condemnation of this so obscure a prisoner, whatever might be the merits of his case.
and have licence to answer for himself] The Greek word for licence is literally “place,” and is here used figuratively for “opportunity.” So Rom_15:23 St Paul says “having no more place in these parts,” by which he means that there is no further opportunity for preaching the Gospel there. So Rev. Ver. gives “have had opportunity to make his defence.”
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv16, 19 (16) To whom I answered . . .—The facts…
(16) To whom I answered . . .—The facts of the case are stated with fair accuracy, but there is a certain measure of ostentation in the way in which Festus speaks of “the manner of the Romans.” It was, perhaps, natural that a procurator just entering on his term of office, should announce, as with a flourish of trumpets, that he at least was going to be rigidly impartial in his administration of justice. It is fair to state that, as far as we know, his conduct was not inconsistent with his profession.
To deliver any man . . .—The use of the same verb as that which St. Paul had used in Act_25:16 shows that the arrow shot at a venture had hit the mark. Festus is eager to repel the charge. The words “to die” (literally, unto destruction) are not found in the best MSS., and seem to have been added by way of explanation. The language of the procurator is strictly official. The accused and the accusers are to stand face to face, and the former is to have an opening for his apologia, or defence, in answer to the indictment.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv16–19 That it is for it is, A.V.; custom for…
That it is for it is, A.V.; custom for manner, A.V.; to give up for to deliver to die, A.V. and T.R.; the accused for he which is accused, A.V.; have had opportunity to make his defense concerning the matter for have license to answer for himself concerning the crime, A.V. To give up (above, ver. 11, note). Have had opportunity to make his defense (topon ajpologiav laboi); see Act_22:1, note.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On v19 One Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to…
Act_25:19
One Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.
Read full note →
Christ alive, a subject of debate
I. Why was Christ, of all persons, the subject of so much observation and debate?
1. Because He claimed the very highest descent.
2. There were proofs embodied in His circumstances and character which none could or can deny, that were equal to His claims and secured unparalleled notableness to His name.
3. Because of the strange circumstances connected with His early history.
II. Why was there such emphasis laid upon the fact of His being alive? If alive--
1. The truthfulness of His character is confirmed.
3. The vital importance of His teaching is established.
3. The work He came to do was accomplished.
4. The success of His cause is assured. (D. Jones.)
The resurrection of Christ as viewed by the man of the world and by the earnest believer
One cannot fail to be struck with the contrast between the results produced by it in Festus and Paul. In the apostle belief in it had kindled a fire of all-sacrificing devotion, and braced him with a courage which no terrors could quell. But Festus received it with complete indifference. Had it been a question of politics or law, that keen judge would have brought all the power of his intellect to bear upon it; but because it referred to an unseen world he dismissed it without for a moment troubling himself to inquire whether it were false or true, and possibly wondered how a man gifted like Paul could waste his powers in proclaiming such an idle tale. Note, then, the aspect of Christs resurrection as viewed--
I. By the man of the world.
1. What is worldliness? The preference of the pleasurable to the right--the visible to the invisible--the transient to the everlasting. Hence the awful questions--What is God? What am I? What is beyond death? are passed by as dreamy and unprofitable questions. And that this was the temper of Festus we infer from the character of his age, and from his opinion of the insanity of Paul. The well-being of his province, the success of his policy, the vision of an old age crowned with wealth, and bright with the sunshine of the emperors favour--these were the great hopes of his soul.
2. To a man in that state the assertion of Paul would inevitably appear as an idle tale. From Pauls statement he would learn that Christ was--
(1) The Teacher of a new truth. But he knew that hatred, persecution, death, were generally the penalties for the proclamation of ideas the world could not understand, or which clashed with existing prejudices. Truth! What was that but an empty name; what enthusiasm and unselfishness but childish weakness?
(2) The Founder of a new religion. This again was a familiar story. Like most cultivated Romans, Festus has lost faith in all religions.
(3) A Revealer of supernatural worlds. If anything could waken his interest and suggest inquiry that would. But to a worldly mind the idea of immortality is dim. Its range of vision and sympathy is limited to the visible and tangible. When do we believe in immortality? When spiritual aspirations are stronger than bodily tendencies, or when sorrow has drawn the veil across earths attractions. From the same source it comes that the risen Christ is to thousands only one Jesus, etc. For to feel Christs resurrection as a power in life demands spiritual sympathy with Christ. The selfish cannot see the beauty of unselfishness, nor the sensual the beauty of purity.
II. By the earnest Christian. Turn from Festus to Paul. To him Christs resurrection was--
1. A sign of the Divinity of His teaching. He had come revealing a new world of truth, and He appealed to His future resurrection as a proof of that truth. He died, but had He not risen, His whole doctrine would have become meaningless. But He rose, and Heavens seal rested on His teaching. If this were false, Paul was indeed a dreamer; but it was true; hence his mighty zeal.
2. A witness to the perfection of His atonement. The question of the ages is, Who shall deliver us from the curse and burden of evil? But One came manifestly bearing this burden, and the only confirmation of the truth of His atonement lay in being able to bear it unconquered. Had He passed away in silence forever, Death would have conquered Him. But He rose and presented the perfect atonement in His own Person in heaven.
3. A pledge of the immortality of man. Man needs a living witness to a life beyond death. He has it in Christ. Paul had it: hence his all-consuming zeal. (E. L. Hull, B. A.)
The death and life of Jesus
I. Jesus died. In this we have--
1. A proof of His humanity. He paid the debt of human nature. Death passed upon all men, Himself not excepted.
2. An exhibition of human sin. Beyond this sin could not go. Diabolism here reached its climax.
3. An example of supreme self-sacrifice. Greater love hath no man than this, etc. But Christ died for His enemies.
4. A demonstration of Divine love. God commendeth, etc.
5. An atonement for the worlds guilt. He bore our sins in His own body on the tree.
6. An anodyne for the worlds sorrow. Death is robbed of its terrors when we remember that Jesus died. To suffer in fellowship with Christ is to glory in tribulations.
II. Jesus is alive. In this fact we have--
1. A proof of His Divinity. He is declared to be the Son of God with power by His resurrection.
2. An exhibition of His power. He has vanquished him who had the power of death.
3. A guarantee of His presence. Lo, I am with you alway.
4. A call to His service. He is Lord of the dead and the living.
5. Eternal hope--Because I live ye shall live also. (J. W. Burn.)
Jesus a living Saviour now
Standing in the crypt of the cathedral of St. Pauls in London your eye is attracted by a huge mass of porphyry, to gain which they searched the continent of Europe. They wanted something large, massive, grand. At length they came upon it in Cornwall, England. They cut it, shaped it, polished it, at last lifted it upon its plinth of Aberdeen granite, and dedicated it as the tomb of their grandest man. On one side you read, Arthur, Duke of Wellington, born May 1, 1769; died September 14, 1852. A great man was buried when they buried him. His hand had been for many a year on the helm of the British Empire. His influence remains, indeed, but his personality has departed. Pass beyond the Channel, and in Paris take your place beneath the golden dome of the Hotel des Invalides, and behold the most magnificent sepulchre in the world. You are gazing now at the burial place of Wellingtons chief antagonist. But Napoleon himself has gone. His influence remains, but he is not in the world. Him neither can France have in any way of personal presence. Go to Rome, stand for a moment under the encircling dome of the Pantheon. Raphael loved that majestic building, more majestic even than St. Peters. It was his wish that he might be buried there. Look! There on the wall it is written, Here is the tomb of Raphael. But Raphael is not there. You may gaze entranced upon his Transfiguration in the Vatican, you may be touched and softened as his wonderful Madonnas tell you the story of that virgin motherhood with its pains, its mysteries, its beatitudes. But Raphael was done with this world at thirty-seven. He puts colour no more to canvas. Everywhere in Rome you may see something that he has done; nowhere can you see anything that he is doing. His works last; he has gone forever. The great heroes, painters, poets, teachers--they have been; but, as to this world, they are no longer. They have gone elsewhere. They have carried their presence with them. They are memories, they are not presences. But Christ is a present, personal, living Saviour. (Christian Age.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
William B. Godbey 1900 · Public Domain On v16 16. “To whom I responded that it is not…
16. “To whom I responded that it is not a custom of the Romans to deliver up any man to death before that the accused may have his accuser face to face, and may receive an opportunity of defense concerning the charge.” Oh, what a noble law! how invaluable and appreciated here in America at the present day. It was adopted in England when the Barons rebelled against the tyranny of King John, and became the Magna Charta of English freedom. Thence transferred to America and adopted by the Colonial Congress, it became the battle-cry in the Revolutionary War, finally triumphing in the victories of Yorktown. It is this day the shibboleth of civil and religious liberty, without which martyrs’ blood would flow as in days of yore. Festus assures Agrippa that there was nothing against Paul except the superstitious clamors of the Jews charging him with disharmony in reference to their own religion, but nothing involving criminality in Roman law, there being a controversy over one “Jesus who is dead, whom Paul certifies incessantly that He liveth.” Agrippa, belonging to the celebrated Herodian family though a mixture of Idumean and Jewish blood, ranked as a Jew and claimed to be a loyal orthodox member of the Mosaic church. Hence we see Paul addresses him as a brother in the church, unlike Lysias, Felix and Festus, who were heathen Romans.
William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
J. W. McGarvey 1914 · Public Domain On vv16–19 See notes on verse 14
See notes on verse 14
J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On v17 "Because what I have just said is true." Fetus…
Therefore
"Because what I have just said is true." Fetus had just said that an accused man should be able to face his accusers and make his defense.
Read full note →
when they came together here
"when the Jewish leaders came to meet with me here"
I sat in the judgment seat
Here "judgment seat" refers to Festus ruling over Paul's trial as judge. AT: "I sat upon the seat to act as judge" or "I sat down as judge" (See: Metonymy)
I ordered the man to be brought in
This can be stated in active form. AT: "I ordered the soldiers to bring Paul before me" (See: Active or Passive)
their own religion
Here "religion" means the belief system people have toward life and the supernatural.
to stand trial there about these charges
To "stand trial" is an idiom meaning to speak to a judge so the judge can decide if a person is right or wrong. AT: "to go to trial about these charges" or "for a judge to decide if these charges against him are true or not" (See: Idiom)
translationWords
judge
Jesus
Paul
Jerusalem
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv16–18 25:16 It was a fundamental principle: Roman law did…
25:16 It was a fundamental principle: Roman law did not convict people without a trial. They must be given an opportunity to confront their accusers and defend themselves (cp. 19:38-39). This put Roman judicial procedure in a favorable light for readers of Acts.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.